Summarized by Dane Carlton
Trilateralism;
The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management
Holly Sklar, ed.
(Boston, South End Press, 1980)
Overview
In
1973 the Trilateral Commission was founded.
Two thirds of the 300 members are from international business and
banking, government, media, and conservative labor.
The purpose of the commission is to engineer a long lasting partnership
between the ruling classes of
North America
,
Western Europe
, and
Japan
. This partnership is believed to
safeguard the interests of Western capitalism while “attempting to mold
public policy and construct a framework for international stability in the
coming decades”. In 1976, three
years after the Trilateral Commission was founded, a foreign policy insider
wrote that: “In the
U.S.
trilateralism has become almost the consensus position on foreign policy”.
Trilateralists don’t speak openly to the public but one can sense
their goals and strategy by their actions.
Trilateralists have three main beliefs:
1.
the people, governments, and economies of all
nations must serve the needs of multinational banks and corporations
2.
control over economic resources spells power in
modern politics
3.
the leaders of capitalist democracies where
economic control and profit (and thus political power) rest with the few
In
short, trilateralism is “the current attempt by ruling elites to manage both
dependence and democracy - at home and abroad.”
Trilateral
Origins: Western Business on the Defensive
Elite
ideology and corporate planning is the backbone of Trilateralism.
Under the umbrella of the welfare/warfare state are the closely linked
domestic and international stability. With
the support of liberals, big labor, and big business policy makers and
presidents alike have stepped up efforts to fight the worldwide war on
communism alongside the domestic war on poverty.
Political repression and expanding social welfare programs maintained
stability at home. The collapse
of the postwar international economics system and crisis in the
welfare/warfare state came with the sixties and early seventies.
This was evident in a 1979 Business Week cover story that claimed:
The
entire U.S.-created post-World War II global economic system is in danger of
destruction.
Sustained
political mobilization and militant protest shook the stability of trilateral
governments. Trilateralists saw
this as a ‘crisis of democracy’ that plagued the West.
Domestic
constraints were placed on
U.S.
military action as the
U.S.
public did not want massive intervention abroad.
Congress took steps to curb the imperial presidency and the CIA.
The main reason for the disintegration of the post-World War II economy
though, was stagflation. Stagflation
is stagnant economic growth with associated widespread unemployment plus
rampant inflation. By the
mid-sixties, the
U.S.
trade surplus had begun to erode and by ’71 the
U.S.
was importing more than it was exporting.
The U.S. dollar began to weaken against the West German mark and the
Japanese yen. Now more than ever
economic reform was needed. President
Nixon and Treasury Secretary John Connally attempted to reassert
U.S.
supremacy with a “New Economic Policy”.
The new strongly protectionist policy attempted to reassert
U.S.
supremacy, but instead violated the rules of free trade.
Soon afterward, the Trilateral Commission was launched.
The Commission’s aim is to “nurture habits and practices of working
together” among the trilateral regions in order to:
1.
promote a healthy level of competition between the
capitalist powers
2.
forge a common front against the
Third World
and
Soviet Union
3.
renovate the international political economy in
the interest of global business and finance
4.
make trilateral democracy more governable
The
Trilateral Commissioners assert that Trilateralism is the necessary response
if corporate capitalism is to endure and prosper.
The
New Corporate Empires
Corporate
allegiances are based on the dictates of worldwide economic profitability and
growth. The chief asset of the
global corporation is mobility and feels most at home in a profit haven.
Trilateralists want corporations to be free to pursue “the true logic
of the global economy”. The
best means by which to utilize world resources are Global corporations.
The Law of Private Profit holds that effort is motivated by greed, more
effort means more output, and more output enhances the ‘common good’.
The real tradeoff, however, is between equality and inequality of
resources and opportunity.
Managing
Third
World
Dependence
The
trilateral goal is to reorient efforts to redistribute global resources into
promotion of a new order for mutual gain.
This is nothing more than the old order for trilateral gain thinly
disguised with a few flourishes of affirmative action for the
Third World
elites. And as seen in the past,
the rich will get richer at the expense of the poor.
In the new trilateral scheme, the poorest countries are to be pacified
with a basic human needs approach. Trilateral
Commissioners, regarding basic human needs, wrote:
The
alleviation of poverty is a demand of the basic principles of the West as well
as simple self-interest. In the
long run an orderly world is unlikely if great affluence in one part coexists
with abject poverty in another while ‘one world’ of communication, of
mutual concern, and interdependence come into being.
In
discussing the goal of alleviating poverty, trilateralists concluded that
without steps to redistribute existing wealth and to reallocate the means of
producing wealth, poverty and hunger are here to stay.
The
‘Human Rights’ Strategy
In
regards to protecting human rights, Pres. Carter launched the Human Rights
campaign. He committed the
United States
to ‘shaping a new world order’ that is ‘just’, ‘peaceful’, and
‘more responsive to human aspirations’.
It should be noted that most, if not all, Trilateral states do not
piously practice the human rights they preach.
For the few times substantive change does occur, it reflects a failure
of the human rights policy, not a success.
Human rights trilateral style is a move played in the game of world
politics and is only played by and for the oppressor.
Managing
Western Democracy
Trilateralists
are concerned with more than managing international events.
They also try to manage North American, West European, and Japanese
democracy. During the ‘60’s
and ‘70’s ruling elites throughout the West were challenged with militant
protest. These protesters came
from a diverse cross-section of the public:
Native Americans, Blacks, Chicanos, workers, women, students, poor
people, etc. The bipartisan
foreign policy consensus was shaken by the domestic antiwar movement while
pressure mounted for a more ‘equitable and democratic political, economic,
and social system’. The only
thing that was sure to follow is the reassertion of the elite rule and decades
of public apathy.